NPP Vendors Perspectives

TM/WS Infrastructure Development

9-12 February 2010

Breakout session – Group 4

TM/WS – Breakout session 9-12 February 2010 2

Group: 4 NPP Vendors perspectives

1. EXPERIENCES

1. Vendors are a key resource for information, as well as the Agency (costs, schedules, detail design, fabrication/manufacture, safety features).

2. Most countries consider proven technologies/design to be an important feature.

3. Depending on technology selection, it will be important to work with the country-of-origin regulator to establish the competence of the host country regulatory authority.

4. For newcomer countries, “experiences” are a less extensive list than “challenges”, given the stage such countries are in vis-à-vis the Milestones process.

TM/WS – Breakout session 9-12 February 2010 3

Group: 4 NPP Vendors perspectives

2. LESSONS LEARNED

1. It is very important for close cooperation among vendors and the host country. Information exchange is critical for a potential host country in assessing various technologies / reactor designs.

2. Vendors must provide extensive demonstration of the technology (plant design, operability, constructability, cost/schedule information, etc.).

3. Reference plants can be a useful tool for newcomer countries in assessing various plant designs. To the extent that they are available, the host country decision-makers should visit such plants.

4. Candidate countries desire openness / transparency from vendors. This desire conflicts, to a certain degree, with vendors’ desire to protect proprietary information. As a result, it is important to balance these competing concerns so that both parties can achieve their goals. This balance will also have to be considered when developing a technology transfer / knowledge transfer plan.

TM/WS – Breakout session 9-12 February 2010 4

Group: 4 NPP Vendors perspectives

3. DIFFICULTIES/CHALLENGES

1. There are difficulties in getting accurate cost and schedule data. Countries also need to distinguish between a vendor’s “overnight cost” number versus the owner’s “all-in cost” number.

2. Once a vendor is selected, and a contract is under execution, it is not possible to change vendors; therefore, picking a vendor is a long-term relationship.

3. Everyone seems to want a plant around 2020; however, the marketplace will not be able to support such demand. As a result, host countries will have to be very diligent in assessing vendor capabilities (supply chain management, getting a vendor/contractor “A” team) to execute the project to support the desired schedule.

4. Any new regulatory body is, by definition, untested. Even if a host country regulator imports the processes and procedures from the country-of-origin regulator, the host country regulator still must regulate. This creates additional risk in the project, and host countries must work with vendors/contractors to manage such risk.

TM/WS – Breakout session 9-12 February 2010 5

Group: 4 NPP Vendors perspectives

4. RECOMMENDATIONS

1. Newcomer countries should consider working with countries with similar experiences in importing country-of-origin standards, codes, regulations, etc. (ie. Spain importing US NRC processes for its first unit).

2. Once the technology is chosen, the host country should consider implementing a training program in close cooperation with the regulatory authority, as well as the operator, from the country-of-origin.

3. In order to create a viable and practical localization plan, the host country must work with the vendor community to understand supply chain and human resource needs / opportunities, while at the same time doing an assessment of host country capacities, capabilities, and quality standards.

4. The host country will also need to involve its industry in the development of the plan, and provide access for such industry to the vendor community.